Credit: Megan Herbert
To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@theage.com.au. Please include your home address and telephone number. No attachments, please include your letter in the body of the email. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published.
Refreshing to read Ken Henry’s assessment (“Nature is critical to productivity”, 25/6) that productivity is enhanced by good environmental laws. For too long has the reverse been considered by some leaders, saying environmentally harmful investment projects will create jobs in order to justify such projects. Uncertainty about environmental laws has deterred domestic and overseas investors. As Henry says, processing of raw materials that Australia has in abundance, would create many jobs. Value added manufacturing would add to this. Instead we are destroying our environment.
Enacting these reforms would take bold leadership, yet this is what voters are wanting. Writers to this paper have been bemoaning the small, albeit necessary, changes to policy by the federal Labor government. Environmental law reform is best tackled in the first year of this second term, so the resultant improvements in productivity can flow through. Will the federal government have the courage?
Jan Marshall, Brighton
Nature is fundamental to progress
Well said that man. Actually, Ken Henry could have gone further; nature is fundamental to productivity. Cleaning up the wreckage of a fire or flood, or burying livestock in a drought may count as economic activities in assessing the GDP, but they’re a negative on the productivity scale. That’s without counting the human cost. The unproductive anxiety levels generated by a deteriorating environment and the accompanying social disruption are beyond measure. Labor have the parliamentary mandate, now let’s see if they have the vision and the courage to do what has to be done. Driving the lobbyists from the steps of Parliament would be a good first step.
John Mosig, Kew
Myopic thinking puts business first
Ken Henry highlights the urgent need for environmental law reform, as proposed by Professor Graeme Samuel. Strict, enforceable regulation of environmental protection could, as he suggests, provide an investment climate within clear limits which enable business development to proceed efficiently, when and where it can, without damaging the environment. Introducing this legislation inspires determined resistance from businesses large and small, who put their immediate interests ahead of the environment that underpins their businesses longer term. This myopia leaves us sliding towards environmental, and economic, collapse.
Chris Young, Surrey Hills
Watt should take note of ‘briefing note’
Environment Minister Murray Watt could hardly get a more incisive briefing note for his task of reforming the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act than Ken Henry’s succinct account. Two of Henry’s observations were particularly telling. One was that only 5 per cent of the nation’s workforce is employed by the industries responsible for ″the extinction of more than 100 species and the loss of more than half the continent’s forests″. The megaphones used by mining, forestry, fishing and agriculture sectors give a completely disproportionate view of this fact. His second remark was that the future viability of these industries depends on care of nature, an irony that seems lost on their protagonists.
Watt’s swift approval of the extension of Woodside’s carbon-polluting North West Shelf project, admittedly conditional, does not instil confidence in his commitment to robust legislative reform. I and many others would be happy to be proved wrong on this score.
Tom Knowles, Parkville
THE FORUM
Your taxes at work
Your correspondent (Letters, 25/6) offers a good solution to the abuse of superannuation tax concessions. The idea that those receiving four times as much or more than the median wage in passive income should pay minimal tax is indefensible, not least because it means those on low incomes and paying full tax are subsidising those with plenty of money in the kitty. No wonder many young hard-working people are angered and feel enslaved.
At present, superannuation returns are strong – a 10 per cent return on $3 million yields $300,000 – while the median wage is about $70,000. Some years may have lower returns, but even one as low as 2.5 per cent (a rare event) earns a healthy $75,000. If superannuation returns are occasionally low, that is generally a flow on from wider economic conditions that cause genuine hardship and threaten employment for others: the impact on them is far greater.
The occasional low super return is no justification for year-in, year-out tax minimisation that exploits others including workers and consumers (noting that GST can work as a broad-brush catch-up source of tax revenue) upon which the economy is ultimately dependent.
Emma Borghesi, Rye
Hard choices needed
Columnist Sean Kelly makes some interesting points (Comment, 23/6) about Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ statement that much-needed tax reform requires not only courage but also consensus. True enough, but consensus will only occur once the electorate can recognise that it’s a matter of the government having the maturity to make the hard choices while there’s still an opportunity to choose.
Chalmers’ three goals of productivity, resilience and sustainability are not just wishful thinking: they should be explicit components of all decision-making, with measurable results. The recent election gave Labor a mandate it must not squander.
Jenifer Nicholls, Windsor
Delivering fairness
Surely if Jim Chalmers is serious about tax reform then he must take account of our current pensions and benefit arrangements. Single people under 55 who receive JobSeeker receive $781 a fortnight while a single age pensioner receives $1149 a fortnight. Everyone accepts that single people on JobSeeker live in poverty. We should have a tax and social security system built primarily on need. It must provide for a living income. The current tax threshold of $18,200 is a joke. Ken Henry in his review recommended then that it should be a minimum of $25,000 annually. Every adult should receive this as a minimum payment.
John Rome, Mt Lawley, WA
Backward steps on Iran
Under president Barack Obama, the United States, along with Britain, France, Russia, China, and Germany, negotiated and signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, in2015.
A key aspect of this deal was that Iran agreed to significantly limit its nuclear program, including capping uranium enrichment, reducing its enriched uranium stockpile, and redesigning its heavy-water reactor.
In exchange, international sanctions against Iran were lifted. Crucially, the deal included a comprehensive inspection and verification regime by the International Atomic Energy Agency, granting inspectors round-the-clock access to Iran’s nuclear sites to ensure compliance.
When Donald Trump became president, he strongly criticised the JCPOA, calling it a ″terrible″ and ″one-sided deal″. In May 2018, the Trump administration officially withdrew the US from the JCPOA and reimposed sanctions on Iran.
Following the US withdrawal, Iran began to incrementally breach its commitments under the deal in retaliation, increasing its uranium enrichment levels and stockpiles beyond the limits set by the JCPOA.
Ross Beale, Moonee Ponds
Looks like destruction
Your correspondent (Letters, 24/6) states that neither the US or Israel intend to destroy any state. I beg to differ. If starving the population, the deaths of more than 54,000, mainly innocent, civilians, and building houses on their land is not designed to destroy the state of Palestine, I am not sure what is.
Russell Patterson, Heathmont
No prize here
Someone should tell President Donald Trump you don’t get the Nobel Peace Prize by attacking another country with the most powerful conventional weapons in the US arsenal. Boastfully announcing a faux ceasefire, which collapsed before it even began, won’t help his chances either. We all want peace in the world, but not one brokered by someone who shoots from the hip.
Nick Toovey, Beaumaris
Let’s pause for a bit
Recent reports in The Age about Donald Trump’s instability, unreliability and lack of focus all paint a disturbing picture.
Having regained the presidency Trump’s ego demands that he has the recognition and adulation that he craves. In particular, he wants to at least match Barack Obama by receiving the Nobel Peace Prize.
Emma Shortis (Comment, 25/6) provides guidance for Australia’s political leaders in how to proceed. Rather than race in and back America in whatever Trump does we should stand back, consider thesituation and take a longer-term view.
Like it or not and regardless of its justification, by unilaterally attacking Iran, the US has broken international law. Rather than blindly support America, Australian leaders need to display courage at this dangerous time.
At any face-to-face meeting Trump would expect flattery, support and acknowledgment of his actions.
In this context, it is in our country’s best interests for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to let things settle down and become clearer before meeting with the ″leader of the free world″.
James Young, Mt Eliza
Wrong expectations
One minute Donald Trump was boasting of his ceasefire deal, the next he was scolding both Israel and Iran over their ceasefire violations. What else did the US president expect when it is a given that a long-lasting-never-surrender enmity has existed between these two Middle East nations?
Eric Palm, Gympie, Qld
Same story everywhere
The Brighton parents should not be so quick to believe that their state primary school is in disrepair because it is in the Liberal heartland of Brighton (″Brighton parents say school is unrepaired thanks to Labor bias″, 25/6). Many state schools in poorer Labor areas are in similar dilapidated states.
Marie Nash, Balwyn
Boss of a solution
Your correspondent (Letters, 24/6) bemoans the introduction of obtuse online security questions such as ″What is your dad’s favourite pizza topping″ for when you forget your password or extra levels of security are in place. Just provide the same answer to every question as there are no logic checks. For example, what is your favourite food? Answer: Springsteen. What is your mother’s maiden name? Springsteen. What was the name of your primary school? Springsteen. And so on.
Mark Southby, Oakleigh
A taxing time
My family is one of the 1779 people assessed, after investigation, for the Vacant Residential Land Tax by the State Revenue Office last year. (″Thousands of empty homes avoid key tax″, 24/6). The SRO backdated its analysis for five years and came up with a VRLT debt of $140,000.
The reasons why our properties were ″vacant″ was because of illness and circumstances beyond our control. None were investment properties and the ″vacancy″ occurred during the COVID lockdowns. The SRO only slightly reduced our debt to take into account our mitigating circumstances.
To now learn from the article that thousands of property owners with vacant properties are not paying anything is very disappointing. We also learnt thatthe VRLT has only raised $20million. This is a minuscule amount. As the Grattan Institute has pointed out, the VRLT, in itself, is unlikely to do much to change Victoria’s housing supply problem.
The SRO made no effort in five years to advise us of the tax. Nor can we see that it even widely advertised its existence in the media. As non-property investors we had no idea it existed. A tax that isn’t uniform, isn’t advertised and is unlikely to be levied on the most obvious (and wealthy) property owners is a bad tax.
David Fry, Moonee Ponds
Humpty Dumpty world
According to Humpty Dumpty in Through the Looking Glass, ″When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.″ Donald Trump and cohorts say ″rules-based international order″ will mean whatever they choose it to mean. Whoever controls the language controls the narrative.
Dawn Richards, Huntingdale
Balancing lifestyle
A timely piece by columnist Charlotte Mortlock on the wellness craze (25/6). As a classicist I’m officially for balance and restraint, but I agree with Rumpole of the Bailey. Avoid wafer thin slices, and never trust anybody who wants to slim you down.
Lindsay Zoch, Mildura
Prize of an epistle
If Donald Trump is nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, as he claims he should, I should be nominated for the Nobel Literature Prize for writing this letter.
Barrie Bales, Woorinen North
Credit: Matt Golding
AND ANOTHER THING
Trump
There goes the Nobel Peace Prize, the one given for ″The greatest benefit for humankind″.
Myra Fisher, Brighton East
Like Vladimir Putin, Benjamin Netanyahu has played Donald Trump like a fiddle.
Giuseppe Corda, Aspendale
Donald Trump’s ″ceasefire″ was as fleeting as his thought bubbles.
George Djoneff, Mitcham
Funny how Barack Obama got Iran to stop enriching uranium, Donald Trump then tore up the agreement and in Trump 2.0 he bombs them and now expects a Nobel Peace Prize.
Graham Fetherstonhaugh, Carlton North
First, it was the ceasefire that wasn’t between India and Pakistan. Now Donald Trump announces another ceasefire in the Middle East that is not. Is senescence setting in?
Helena Kilingerova, Vermont
Donald Trump may keep on crowing, but eventually grim reality will dawn.
Meg McPherson, Brighton
After bombing Iran and declaring “peace” Donald Trump says, “They’ve got it out of their system”, as if the boys went behind the sports shed for fisticuffs to sort it out.
Maureen Goldie, Blackwood
Better the ″F-bomb″ than a nuclear one.
Henry Herzog, St Kilda East
Trump goes nuclear and drops the ″F bomb″.
Paul Custance, Highett
“Truce teeters” (25/6), who knew?
Lawrie Bradly, Surrey Hills
Furthermore
What if the Liberal Party’s inquiry into its ″reason for existence″ turns up nothing?
Bernd Rieve, Brighton
How ironic that the party that wanted to cut thousands of public sector jobs, especially in Canberra, is now bemoaning cuts in government paid for jobs.
Graeme Gardner, Reservoir